> It sounds like an interesting idea; I always prefer a game that requires certain skill or tactics over the simple random roll of dice in order to win. But this part here (the preceding paragraphs) needs a little tweaking. According to your description, Joe_Schmoe has no options whatsoever. He can either agree to become a minion in Fred_1's alliance, or be bombed into submission. He should also have the option of making a first strike. That seems to be a bit more fair. Otherwise, upon receiving the initial email, he'd know that he has no recourse and will be assimilated into Fred_1's alliance. The only way this wouldn't happen would be if Fred_1 suspected Joe_Schmoe of already being in an alliance, a stronger alliance, and chickened out of his bomb threat.
> Anywho, I like the premise, but perhaps a few more options as far as how a person can react to a threat or other details could be worked out.
>
> But maybe that's for the sequel.
>
> Tran"splanting alliances all over the nat"io"n"


You're right. This is still in the very early stages - there are probably millions of little flaws with it.

I like the idea where you can't learn if someone's in an alliance or not - that way, you'd be forced to make judgment calls.

As for the "first strike" idea... I'm thinking perhaps that that is a little unfair. Maybe we could just throw in a bit of randomness, to decide who gets first strike.

Also, I came up with the thought that, once your alliance exceeds 5 members, your HQ needs to be hit as many times as there are members in your alliance before you are forced to surrender.

Anyone have thoughts or expanding ideas?